Manfred,
You wrote: “The point is, that as soon as the errors in the Sixtus edition were uncovered, Catholic scholars prepared a revised edition relatively quickly, even given the nature of those tumultuous times. ergo, since the Clementine lasted a bit longer
it can’t be all that poor an edition.”
Uh, I don’t see how that is the point since no one denied that in this thread as far as I can remember. Also, the Clementine lasted much longer, not necessarily because of its superiority to a previous edition, but because the popes of the late sixteenth century and afterward thought it good enough for the time being. Even Catholic authorities admit it was a provisional text (even if it lasted over 300 years). An essentially sound edition was needed. The Clementine was that edition. When Cardinal Valverde objected to the Clementine vulgate (which was not even yet published) Pope Clement forbade him to ever speak or write about the issue. The pope just wanted a good, solid edition and not the perfect one Valverde fantasized about.
“Ever wonder when, or even IF, the Church will either
(a) produce its very own definitive Greek and Hebrew texts,
or at least, (b) make a pronouncement endorsing those produced by others?”
Nope. There is no reason for me to wonder those ideas.